RESUMO
PURPOSE: Renal cell carcinoma is an aggressive disease with a high mortality rate. Management has drastically changed with the new era of immunotherapy, and novel strategies are being developed; however, identifying systemic treatments is still challenging. This paper presents an update of the expert panel consensus from the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group on advanced renal cell carcinoma management in Brazil. METHODS: A panel of 34 oncologists and experts in renal cell carcinoma discussed and voted on the best options for managing advanced disease in Brazil, including systemic treatment of early and metastatic renal cell carcinoma as well as nonclear cell tumours. The results were compared with the literature and graded according to the level of evidence. RESULTS: Adjuvant treatments benefit patients with a high risk of recurrence after surgery, and the agents used are pembrolizumab and sunitinib, with a preference for pembrolizumab. Neoadjuvant treatment is exceptional, even in initially unresectable cases. First-line treatment is mainly based on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the choice of treatment is based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMCD) risk score. Patients at favourable risk receive ICIs in combination with TKIs. Patients classified as intermediate or poor risk receive ICIs, without preference for ICI + ICIs or ICI + TKIs. Data on nonclear cell renal cancer treatment are limited. Active surveillance has a place in treating favourable-risk patients. Either denosumab or zoledronic acid can be used for treating metastatic bone disease. CONCLUSION: Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are the standards of care for advanced disease. The utilization and sequencing of these therapeutic agents hinge upon individual risk scores and responses to previous treatments. This consensus reflects a commitment to informed decision-making, drawn from professional expertise and evidence in the medical literature.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Renais , Neoplasias Renais , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Renais/patologia , Neoplasias Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , América Latina , Consenso , SunitinibeRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is an important clinical stage of prostate cancer, prior to morbidity and mortality from clinical metastases. In particular, the introduction of novel androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSi) has changed the therapeutic landscape in nmCRPC. Given recent developments in this field, we update our recommendations for the management of nmCRPC. METHODS: A panel of 51 invited medical oncologists and urologists convened in May of 2021 with the aim of discussing and providing recommendations regarding the most relevant issues concerning staging methods, antineoplastic therapy, osteoclast-targeted therapy, and patient follow-up in nmCRPC. Panel members considered the available evidence and their practical experience to address the 73 multiple-choice questions presented. RESULTS: Key recommendations and findings include the reliance on prostate-specific antigen doubling time for treatment decisions, the absence of a clear preference between conventional and novel (i.e., positron-emission tomography-based) imaging techniques, the increasing role of ARSis in various settings, the general view that ARSis have similar efficacy. Panelists highlighted the slight preference for darolutamide, when safety is of greater concern, and a continued need to develop high-level evidence to guide the intensity of follow-up in this subset of prostate cancer. DISCUSSION: Despite the limitations associated with a consensus panel, the topics addressed are relevant in current practice, and the recommendations can help practicing clinicians to provide state-of-the-art treatment to patients with nmCRPC in Brazil and other countries with similar healthcare settings.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/terapia , Humanos , Masculino , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Receptores de Andrógenos/uso terapêutico , Consenso , Brasil , OsteoclastosRESUMO
PURPOSE: To present a summary of the recommendations for the treatment and follow-up for the biochemical recurrence of castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) as acquired through a questionnaire administered at the Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries. METHODS: A total of 27 questions were identified as relating to this topic. Responses from the clinician were tallied and are presented in percentage format. Topics included the use of imaging in staging, treatment recommendations across different patient scenarios of life expectancy and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time, and follow-up for nonmetastatic castration-resistant PCa. RESULTS: A consensus agreed that in optimal conditions, positron emission tomography-computed tomography with prostate-specific membrane antigen would be used although in limited resource situations the combined use of CT of the abdomen and pelvic (or pelvic MRI), a bone scan, and a CT of the thorax or chest x-ray was recommended. In cases when PSA levels double in < 10 months, more than 90% of clinicians agreed on the use of apalutamide or enzalutamide, regardless of life expectancy. With a doubling time of more than 10 months, > 54% of experts recommended no treatment independent of life expectancy. More than half of the experts, regardless of resources, recommended follow-up with a physical examination and PSA levels every 3-6 months and imaging only in the case of symptoms. CONCLUSION: The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support management for biochemical recurrence of castration-resistant PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Países em Desenvolvimento , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios XRESUMO
PURPOSE: The outcome of RCC has improved considerably in the last few years, and the treatment options have increased. LACOG-GU and LARCG held a consensus meeting to develop guidelines to support the clinical decisions of physicians and other health professionals involved in the care of RCC patients. METHODS: Eighty questions addressing relevant advanced RCC treatments were previously formulated by a panel of experts. The voting panel comprised 26 specialists from the LACOG-GU/LARCG. Consensus was determined as 75% agreement. For questions with less than 75% agreement, a new discussion was held, and consensus was determined by the majority of votes after the second voting session. RESULTS: The recommendations were based on the highest level of scientific evidence or by the opinion of the RCC experts when no relevant research data were available. CONCLUSION: This manuscript provides guidance for advanced RCC treatment according to the LACOG-GU/LARCG expert recommendations.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Renais/diagnóstico , Carcinoma de Células Renais/terapia , Neoplasias Renais/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Renais/terapia , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Terapia Combinada , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução/métodos , Gerenciamento Clínico , Prova Pericial , Humanos , América Latina , Metastasectomia/métodos , Nefrectomia/métodos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Padrão de CuidadoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Renal cell cancer (RCC) is one of the 10 most common cancers in the world, and its incidence is increasing, whereas mortality is declining only in developed countries. Therefore, two collaborative groups, The Latin American Oncology Cooperative Group-Genitourinary Section (LACOG-GU) and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group (LARCG), held a consensus meeting to develop this guideline. METHODS: Issues (134) related to the treatment of RCC were previously formulated by a panel of experts. The voting panel comprised 26 specialists (urologists and medical oncologists) from the LACOG-GU/LARCG. A consensus was reached if 75% agreement was achieved. If there was less concordance, a new discussion was undertaken, and a consensus was determined by the most votes after a second voting session. RESULTS: The expert meeting provided recommendations that were in line with the global literature; 75.0% of the recommendations made by the panel of experts were evidence-based level A, 22.5% of the recommendations were level B, and 2.5% of the recommendations were level D. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests recommendations for the surgical treatment of RCC according to the LACOG-GU/LARCG experts.
RESUMO
ABSTRACT Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer deaths. In Brazil, it is likewise the second most common cancer among men, second only to non-melanoma skin cancers. The aim of this consensus is to align different opinions and interpretations of the medical literature in a practical and patient-oriented approach. The first Brazilian Consensus on the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer was published in 2017, with the goal of reducing the heterogeneity of therapeutic conduct in Brazilian patients with metastatic prostate cancer. We acknowledge that in Brazil the incorporation of different technologies is a big challenge, especially in the Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), which allows for the disparity in the options available to patients treated in different institutions. In order to update the recommendations and to make them objective and easily accessible, once more a panel of specialists was formed in order to discuss and elaborate a new Brazilian Consensus on Advanced Prostate Cancer. This Consensus was written through a joint initiative of the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology (SBOC) and the Brazilian Society of Urology (SBU) to support the clinical decisions of physicians and other health professionals involved in the care of patients with prostate cancer.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Consenso , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Sociedades Médicas , Brasil , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Metástase Neoplásica , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer and the fi fth leading cause of cancer deaths. In Brazil, it is likewise the second most common cancer among men, second only to non-melanoma skin cancers. The aim of this consensus is to align different opinions and interpretations of the medical literature in a practical and patient-oriented approach. The fi rst Brazilian Consensus on the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer was published in 2017, with the goal of reducing the heterogeneity of therapeutic conduct in Brazilian patients with metastatic prostate cancer. We acknowledge that in Brazil the incorporation of different technologies is a big challenge, especially in the Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), which allows for the disparity in the options available to patients treated in different institutions. In order to update the recommendations and to make them objective and easily accessible, once more a panel of specialists was formed in order to discuss and elaborate a new Brazilian Consensus on Advanced Prostate Cancer. This Consensus was written through a joint initiative of the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology (SBOC) and the Brazilian Society of Urology (SBU) to support the clinical decisions of physicians and other health professionals involved in the care of patients with prostate cancer.
Assuntos
Consenso , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Brasil , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Humanos , Masculino , Metástase Neoplásica , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Sociedades MédicasRESUMO
ABSTRACT Introduction Prostate cancer still represents a major cause of morbidity, and still about 20% of men with the disease are diagnosed or will progress to the advanced stage without the possibility of curative treatment. Despite the recent advances in scientific and technological knowledge and the availability of new therapies, there is still considerable heterogeneity in the therapeutic approaches for metastatic prostate cancer. Objectives This article presents a summary of the I Brazilian Consensus on Advanced Prostate Cancer, conducted by the Brazilian Society of Urology and Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology. Materials and Methods Experts were selected by the medical societies involved. Forty issues regarding controversial issues in advanced disease were previously elaborated. The panel met for consensus, with a threshold established for 2/3 of the participants. Results and Conclusions The treatment of advanced prostate cancer is complex, due to the existence of a large number of therapies, with different response profiles and toxicities. The panel addressed recommendations on preferred choice of therapies, indicators that would justify their change, and indicated some strategies for better sequencing of treatment in order to maximize the potential for disease control with the available therapeutic arsenal. The lack of consensus on some topics clearly indicates the absence of strong evidence for some decisions.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Próstata/patologia , Consenso , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , Brasil , Guias de Prática Clínica como AssuntoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Cytotoxic chemotherapy is the mainstay treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan are the most active drugs; however, their optimal sequencing has not yet been established. Some evidence has shown that upfront treatment with 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI regimen) can improve outcomes for patients with mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic search in electronic databases. Studies reporting results from prospective, randomized clinical trials comparing FOLFOXIRI to less aggressive regimens for treatment of mCRC were selected for meta-analysis. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and toxicity were the outcomes of interest. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and pooled odds ratio (OR) was calculated for the time-to-event endpoints and dichotomous endpoints, respectively. RESULTS: Four studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled data showed a significant benefit favoring FOLFOXIRI in terms of OS (HR, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.92), PFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.85), and ORR (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.36-2.67). Toxicity was significantly greater in the FOLFOXIRI arm. Heterogeneity across trials and risk of publication bias were low. CONCLUSION: FOLFOXIRI provides superior outcomes for mCRC compared with standard chemotherapy regimens. The toxicity is greater with FOLFOXIRI but manageable. The role of targeted agents combined with FOLFOXIRI is uncertain, and further research is warranted.